Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 16:45:54 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: more info on cvs
Message-ID: <20010430164554.A619@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <m3pudu707l DOT fsf AT gnus DOT cvs DOT 983032537> <3AEDAF0F DOT 80309 AT home DOT com> <3AEDC190 DOT 9D040061 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.11i
In-Reply-To: <3AEDC190.9D040061@ece.gatech.edu>; from cwilson@ece.gatech.edu on Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 03:48:32PM -0400

On Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 03:48:32PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
>Technically, I think the cvs protocol itself expects that paths are
>specified using backslash.  However, certain implementations/ports of
>cvs to native windows have relaxed that, so that Windows users can use
>"normal" backslashes when specifying pathnames.  Then, netbeans/forte
>took that laxness as license (or perhaps the developers at Sun just
>said, "Hey, windows -- paths have backslashes -- okay, we'll do that
>too")
>
>What we're left with is this: we can either (a) limit pathnames to using
>only '/' as specified by the spec (which also, BTW, explicitly *allows*
>'\' as a normal char in a filename !!!), or (b) violate the spec and
>adapt cvs on cygwin to explicitly convert '\' to '/' every time.
>
>The problem is, some remote system to which your local cygwin-cvs client
>talks, might have a file with a *legal* name containing '\'.  What do we
>do then?
>
>I'm in favor of (b), and treat the "problem" above as another
>windows-ism (like the fact that "aux" is an illegal name on windows but
>is FINE everywhere else on the planet...)
>
>--Chuck
>
>P.S. Sorry for being slow to respond, Heitzso, but I've been very busy
>with (a) my job (b) cygwin release 1.3.0^H1, (c) ncurses release 5.2-5
>lately. :-)  I "maintain" about 20 packages and it's getting to be
>pretty overwhelming...

I'd actually be in favor of the "do nothing since it isn't broken"
scenario.

While the Cygwin DLL does try to do the right thing with MS-DOS paths I
don't see any urgent need to adapt every tool that comes with Cygwin to
do the same.  The point of Cygwin is that it is supposed to provide a
UNIX environment.  I certainly don't want to see package maintainers
spending their precious time fiddling with sources to accomodate MS-DOS
(IMO) brain-damage.

Whether you do take time to do this is, of course, up to you Chuck.
I appreciate your maintainership very much but I don't want to add
to your burden unduly.

cgf

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple